[Jim McDougall]

It has been previously mentioned, in quoting the famed Maratha naval admiral Sarkhel Kanhoji Angre (1698-1729) that "..the English blades were only fit to cut butter with".
Rawson (1969. p.45) notes that there can be no doubt that English blades were 'brought'(?) by the Marathas, but factory correspondence shows they were regarded as highly unsatisfactory. Grose in 1772 )"Voyages to the East Indies") notes that a letter written by an EIC servant expressly states that the Marathas would not buy English blades, but only German (Solingen), Italian and Spanish RAPIER blades.

Pant (1980, p.70) notes that after the British occupation in the 18th century these RAPIERS became very popular in India also. Sometimes the rapier blades have been fitted to the firangi (khanda) and other Indian swords also (pata?).

OBSERVATION:

Exactly what English blades were being offered or provided in these times?
At the time of Admiral Angre, in the late 17th early 18th the rapier had largely become obsolete (except typically in Spain) and the small sword had become the fashionable civilian sword. The English blade making industry was virtually non existent but for the German oriented Hounslow factory up to mid 17th and Shotley Bridge in latter 17th. While there were some makers in Oxford their production was limited, and through these times the only blades produced were 'arming' blades of single edge usually for mortuary type swords......certainly NOT rapiers.
I have seen many European arming swords such as 'pappenheimers' referred to as rapiers.....though their heavy but relatively narrow blades are obviously not 'rapier'.

As previously mentioned, the Italian blades were likely schiavona types, a heavier blade usually broadsword but later backsword, and with these complex hilts, were often regarded as a type of arming rapier.

As mentioned, most of the Spanish blades in early to latter 18th c. were nearly invariably made in Solingen and mounted with DE dragoon blades (arming) with hexagonal section but in cuphilts (colonial) they were often termed rapiers by writers. Obviously in Spain it was 'espade de taza' , indeed using the espada term.

The reason I have attended to this remark on the English blades is that some of the text in references uses the term rapier and is pertinent.

Returning to the comment in context with English blades, that after the British occupation in India in 18th c. the 'RAPIER' blades became popular.
The only English 'rapier' blade I can think of was the small sword, which was of course mostly a dress sword, or perhaps dueling epee, yet due to the similarity of hilt styles was often referred to generally as a 'rapier'.
In the famed battle of Lt. Maynard vs. Blackbeard in 1718, in the action Maynard's sword (a smallsword) had its blade snap in half.
Perhaps similar result with these type blades were the source of Angre's comment. It seems quite possible that Angre's comment was somewhat politically motivated, considering the conflicts between him and them.

As the English could barely supply their own demands and relied primarily on Solingen imports for blades, how could they sell to the Marathas? there were few makers. Even by mid 18th c. there were only 3 or 4 makers in Birmingham aside from probably numbers of independants not recorded.